Pages
▼
Friday, June 30, 2006
Queensryche-Operation Mindcrime 2, 2006
Doing a sequel to one of your most successful albums is a bit of a two edged sword. By doing this you should guarantee higher albums at least initially just based of using the album title. However by using that album title this probably raises the expectations of the fans and the sequel like any sequel will ultimately be compared to the original. Doing a sequel years after the original album has been done before as both King Diamond and Helloween have done it in recent years. Queensryche are a much bigger band though so they are the ones who have received a lot of press over this project. I didn't have high hopes for this one, but my biggest fear was that they would try to force the sound to be reminiscent of the original Mindcrime, but they don't. However the crime they comment on numerous songs is that they try to sound "modern". Perhaps I should say they sound like a bunch of forty somethings trying to sound like what they think is modern. Instead we get a number of annoying songs and a number of boring ones. I think there is an audience out there that would have embraced an album that was similar in style to the first Mindcrime yet those are the same fans who already like the band. I think the band had hopes of bringing in some newer and younger fans as well, but instead I don't think they have pleased much of anybody with this album. The vocals are generally solid and there are some good riffs and some fine moments here and there yet it's not enough to salvage this one. It's overlong and really failed to keep my attention for the whole time. To me the three worst things an album can be is annoying, lame and boring. This album has moments of all three of those. It's not awful, but it's well below average. If you have to have a copy then wait a few months and get it out of the bargain bin because I am sure there will be some copies there.
interesting take on things. especially, "sounds like a bunch of 40 somethings..." So true, and isn't that a shame?
ReplyDeletemakes you wonder how the Rolling Stones crossed generations like they did.
As everyone knows, I am a Queensryche fan, and I have to agree with Mark on this. I listened to this album probably 10 or so times.......trying so hard to really get into it. It didn't work. O:M I is one of my favorite albums of all time, but O:M II is just ok. I really enjoy the whole story and wish someone would make a movie out of it, but the music on the second album just isn't up to par with the original album......or most of their previous albums. I think it's due to the fact that Chris DeGarmo is out flying planes and had no input. Geoff Tate's voice is still great, but again, not as excited as I wish I was about this album.
ReplyDeleteI'm going to see them perform O:M I & II back to back in the fall. We'll, see how I feel about it after that. OK, done rambling now.........
Like Mike, I'm a huge Queensryche fan, too, and I was disappointed in the cd overall, as well. There are a couple of good songs, but that's about it. Mike also makes a good point about the DeGarmo factor; he wrote about half the songs on O:M I, and was a huge piece of the band before he left.
ReplyDeleteBTW...I'm 53; what is a 40 year old supposed to sound like?
Onmywatch-Not everyone believes the Stones did that.
ReplyDeleteMike- I am sure they will be good live.
Fred-That's kind of surprising because it was probably the most talked about hard rock/metal release of the first half of the year.
Bruce-It's not as much being an age as it is being who you are. Lemmy is 60, but he still rocks because he knows what his audience is and he knows his limitations. I think Queensryche spent several songs on their album trying to be something they are not and it just makes them sound old and out of touch.
maybe they wouldn't, but nobody should deny them their reign between '65-'89, at least. and even if their newer stuff isn't fabulous at least their concerts contain new material as opposed to most ancient rockers who just milk their few hit singles from back in the day.
ReplyDeleteokay, I'm done now. :)
Unlike the pundits I find Tate's voice to be limited and mundane on this one, almost like he's just going through the motions. The first 3 songs (not counting the intro) end the same exact way - he screaming a lame note - I suppose that's emotion, but sounds washed-up to me. I think the album is depressing, repetive and boring. Stick a fork in em, QR is done. As far as seeing them live - pay attention, half of what your hearing is pre-recorded.
ReplyDeleteAnd I am/was a ryche-head - saw them live at least 10 times and GT solo as well. Hard to believe its the same guy from Rage For Order
Onmywatch- I like the Stones a lot, but for me the good period ended around the mid-1970's. There were a few good albums here and there after that, but not too many. I think they stayed good live for a while though. Then again they did so much between 65-74 that they didn't have to do a whole lot else because they had alreay established their legacy just during that period.
ReplyDeleteRegarding Mindcrime II: Thanks for busting on Queensryche, Mark. You know I appreciate it.
ReplyDeleteRegarding the Stones: The Stones have become the worlds greatest Stones cover band. A bunch of old men trying to recapture the sound and passion of Exile on Main St and earlier. If you listen to any of the solo stuff from Jagger or Richards over the last 15 or so years, it's actually really good whereas the Stones haven't done much worthwhile in 30 years. The solo stuff is good, because it's them being who they are, not who they were.